Evidence Hub

Multipolar radiofrequency ablation: Early experience with a novel approach to target intramural ventricular arrhythmias

Bazzi M, Venn R, Pipilas D, Habel N, Hauf T, Nguyen T, Cagnon P, Hucker W et al.

Heart rhythm, 2026

31 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Conventional radiofrequency ablation (RFA) may fail to treat ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) if the target is located deep within the myocardium. We have previously demonstrated successful treatment of intramural VAs using multipolar ablation (MPA).

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of MPA as a means to treat refractory VAs. Accordingly, we herein report a series of patients with refractory VAs treated with MPA.

METHODS: This observational retrospective case series included 31 consecutive patients who underwent 36 MPA procedures for premature ventricular contractions (n = 20) and ventricular tachycardia (n = 16). All patients exhibited evidence of intramural origin by defined mapping criteria. Two or more mapping electrodes were incorporated into the ablation circuit as return poles. Ablation-return configurations included left ventricle (LV) endocardium-LV epicardium, LV endocardium-right ventricle (RV) endocardium, and LV or RV endocardium-epicardial vein tributaries.

RESULTS: A total of 151 MPA lesions were delivered with an RFA of 60 s, power of 22 W, initial current of 379 mA, and impedance drop of 19 Ω. Technical limitations of lesion delivery included high impedance in coronary sinus branches and char formation on return electrodes. Acute success was observed in 34 cases (94%), near-term success in 25 cases (69%), and long-term success in 23 cases (70%). There were no major complications.

CONCLUSION: MPA may facilitate arrhythmia control in patients with…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 31 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free